The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1887-08-16
The Press and Privileged Commune
cations.

Recently an application was made
by large firm of gun manufacturers
in England for an injunction to
restrain a public journal from pub
fishing certain alleged defamatory
statements regarding the dealings of
the firm with the government in re
lation to ordinance contracts, and
this application was denied by
the Queens Bench Division of the
High Court of Justice, Lord Chief
Justice Coleridge, who delivered the
leading opinion, holding that the
publications complained of were, I'M
der the circumstances, privileged
communications. The subject and
the occasion were privileged, Lord
Coleridge said, and that being so
the burden of proving malice rested
on the plaintiffs, who had their
remedy by suit in the ordinary way
This decision, says Bradstreets, re-
calls that made by the Supreme
Court of Pennsylvania some months
ago, where a communication regard
ing the character of q candidate for
Office, read by the chairman of a pub
lie meeting, was declared to be SINH
larly a privileged communication.
The statement of the law just made
by Lord Chief Justice Coleridge is
one of the greatest interest to the
public IN general, and of very special
interest to journalists in particular
1t forbids the use of the e1traordi-
nary remedy of injunction to sup
press disclosures which the public
interest may require to be made. The
decision is an application of the
principle, which is constantly receiv-
ing wider recognition, that communi
cations are privileged which are made
in good frath to persons having a
legitimate interest in the information
sought and where the persons by
whom the communications are made
stand in such a relation to those to
whom they are made as to render the
making of the communications
reasonable duty. Under the ruling
Of the Court of Queens Bench journ-
alists may be the makers of commu-
nications which can be designated as
privileged within the meaning of
that word as used in the law of libel,
and they are under duty to the pub
lie to make disclosures which affect
the public interest nearly, even if
such disclosures be prejudicial to
particular individuals.
According to Lord Denman, who
concurred in the opinion rendered by
Lord Chief Justice Coleridge, jour
nahst is only doing his duty to his
country in exposing system which is
ruinous and dangerous to the public
interest. Lord Coleridge insisted
strongly upon this consideration of
public interest and implicitly, of pub
lie duty He says: If anything
stated IN the libel be true, the person
who exposes such a system and such
mischief does great public service,
and I cannot for moment hesitate by
saying that the subject matter which
constitutes the writing about it is a
privileged communication. The IN
DERIVING reason for the rule upon
which the court acted in the case re-
ferred to Is, in general terms, that it
is for the interest Of society that in
yestigation should take place in all
cases where there is reasonable and
probable cause for inquiry, and that
it IS vain and impolitic to endeavor to
prohibit the making Of such inyesti-
cation or the publication of the re
suits Of the same when made. This
basis of the law of privileged commu-
nications was pointed out by philo-
sophical writer on the law of libel
more than fifty years ago; his words
have not been without influence on
the development of the law since his
time, and they now find an echo in
the Judgment of the Court of Queens
Bench.